Talk:Borg-Species 8472 War
FA status FA nomination (02 Oct - 08 Oct 2004, Success) Borg-Species 8472 War. Self-nomination. -- EtaPiscium 08:18, 2 Oct 2004 (CEST) * Support. --BlueMars 13:50, Oct 2, 2004 (CEST) Renomination while still an FA (23 June 2005) Borg-Species 8472 War. A very well writen, detailed, relevent, and important article. Tobyk777 June 23, 2005 :Um, according to the article, since 02:06, 20 Dec 2004 this article is a Featured Article... AmdrBoltz 20:48, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::Forgive me if I'm wrong, but are both of those not already featured articles? -AJHalliwell 19:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::They are. Tough Little Ship 19:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) Renomination while still an FA (25 June 2005) Borg-Species 8472 War: A very unusual, but interesting part of Trek. Tobyk777 25 June 2005 FA removal (06 June - 16 June 2008, Success) I would like to suggest the removal of the article Borg-Species 8472 War from FA status because of the formatting error. How can this article be an FA when there is a sign at the bottom that says it needs attention? TrekFan 01:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC) :Support unless changes are made to it to satisfy the pna. It seems to be more incomplete than unformatted, though.--31dot 01:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC) ::Support. Agree with 31dot about the PNA. Plus, with the self-nomination and single supporting vote back from 2004, how can we call this a featured article? — Topher 04:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC) FA status removed.– Cleanse 01:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC) Page Move Was it really neccesarry to change the entire name of the article just to add the "Species"? (unless, of course, you had already created the page before you knew that the other one existed) -- User:2 of 4 :I thought the formal title should use the full name (or designation) of the races in question ("Species 8472"), rather than a contraction ("8472") that was only used casually a few times on VOY. -- EtaPiscium 08:59, 13 Sep 2004 (CEST) Casualties In the topic, it's mentioned that in the battle of Spatial Matrix 010, Grid 19 alone, the Borg lost eight planets, 312 ships, and 4,000,621 drones. In the episode wasn't the drone casualties quoted (though i can't remember what exactly) in the billions? 19:00, Nov 17, 2005 :Yeah. I thought I heard that too. And anyway, conventional weapons weren't useless against them. Tuvok said that the bioship was damaged by a Borg disruptor blast.--The All-knowing Sith'ari 20:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC) ::Changed to "nearly impervious", as per your point. As for the numbers, they are accurate. From the episode: "Species 8472 has penetrated Matrix Zero-One-Zero, Grid Nineteen. Eight planets destroyed, three hundred twelve vessels disabled, four million, six hundred twenty-one Borg eliminated." -- Kingfisher 20:13, 6 June 2007 (UTC) PNA-unformatted Ep references at bottom of page should really be integrated into the article, so as to no keep the reader guessing where the info is coming from. --Alan del Beccio 00:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC) :Wait, why was it removed? Alan's concern hasn't been met.– Cleanse talk 12:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC) ::I've put it back. --OuroborosCobra talk 14:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC) :::Cleanup up all of the references now. Also added (detailed) bits for three of the references which were not in the article previously. -- sulfur 17:57, 1 January 2009 (UTC) Removed Line though it is possible this conflict was one of the reasons the Collective developed the class 4 tactical cube. I removed this line for two reasons: 1: It is pure speculation. 2: Seven was already familiar with Tactical Cube's during "Unimatrix Zero," so it is more likely that they existed prior to her liberation from the Collective. --Nero210 04:58, May 18, 2010 (UTC) ¿Pyrrhic Victory? ¿Say Who? The Borg’s losses may have been high, but if 8472’s losses were proportionally higher it’s not a Pyrrhic victory. Unless those numbers can be discovered, the reference as “Pyrrhic” is an opinion not based on facts in evidence- In other words, just made up. AJ REDDDSON :Relative ratios are not what determine whether a victory is Pyrrhic. Whether the winning side took such enormous losses as to make the victory almost as bad as a loss is. The Borg were literally losing entire planets, to say nothing of fleets. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:17, December 28, 2011 (UTC) Removed conclusion I've removed the following paragraph from the end of this article: "The Borg-Species 8472 War stands out as one of the few examples in which the Borg were outmatched in a conventional armed conflict. The long-term ramifications of the contact between the two species remained unclear." Firstly, the note isn't cited, so it appears speculative. How do we know the war was "one of the few examples in which the Borg were outmatched in a conventional armed conflict" if that is never stated on screen? Secondly, we don't state what isn't known. --Defiant (talk) 10:15, February 28, 2016 (UTC) Redundant Phraseology The text in question currently reads "highly resistant and completely impervious". This is like saying "warm and hot" when describing a single temperature. It's somewhat redundant, yet to the extent which the descriptions of "highly resistant" and "completely impervious" are different, the 2nd is simply a more extreme version of the 1st. Like "cold and freezing". 00:47, November 11, 2016 (UTC) :Feel free to remove or change something that you find problematic. 31dot (talk) 01:15, November 11, 2016 (UTC)